Karnataka High Court
Sri J Sreenivas vs Mr Barakat Ahmed Saleem on 17 February, 2026
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:9782
WP No. 32769 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 32769 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI J SREENIVAS
S/O, LATE B JAGANATH
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT NO 86, SBI OFFICERS RESIDENCY,
BEHIND BWSSB RESERVOR,
KODICHIKKANAHALLI,
BANGALORE-560076
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HARISH H.V, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR BARAKAT AHMED SALEEM
Digitally signed
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
by
SHARADAVANI B S/O MR. M.A. HALEEM,
Location: High
Court of R/AT.NO. 16/146, 6TH CROSS,
Karnataka
3RD MAIN, WILSON GARDEN,
BANGALORE-560027.
2. SMT. J.SAVITHRI
W/O. LATE.B.JAGANNATH,
R/AT. NO.4, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST CROSS,
SHANKARA LAYOUT, NAJAMBHA AGRAHARA,
T.R. MILL, BANGALORE-560018.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:9782
WP No. 32769 of 2024
HC-KAR
3. SRI. J. RAJAKANTH,
S/O. LATE. JAGANNATH,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT. NO.4, 1ST FLOOR, 1 CROSS,
SHANKARA LAYOUT, NAJAMBHA AGRAHARA,
T.R. MILL, BANGALORE-560018.
4. SRI. J. JAIKANTH,
S/O, LATE. JAGANNATH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT.NO.21, 20TH STREET,
DAE TOWNSHIP, KALPAKKAM,
TAMIL NADU 603102.
5. SMT. J. KUSUMA
D/O LATE JAGANNATH,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT.NO. 142, 1ST FLOOR,
NAGASHETTYHALLI,
BANGALORE-560094.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.V. SHASHI KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
VIDE ORDER DATED 21.02.2025, NOTICE TO R2 TO R5 IS
DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 24.10.2024 PASSED BY THE XXX ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN
O.S.NO.7427/2014 ON I.A.NO.XI, FILED UNDER ORDER 26
RULE 10(a) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND
CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION (I.A.NO.XI), FILED
UNDER ORDER 26 RULE 10(a) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, ON
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:9782
WP No. 32769 of 2024
HC-KAR
ITS FILE.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE XXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN O.S.NO.7427/2014,
PENDING DISPOSAL OF THIS WRIT PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition by the defendants in OS No. 7427/2014 is directed against the impugned order passed on IA No. 11 by the XXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru dated 24.10.2024 whereby the said application filed by the petitioner - defendant No. 2 under Order XXVI Rule 10 (a) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as CPC for short) to refer the admitted signatures of late B. Jagannath found on Ex.P.1, original sale agreement dated 22.02.2023 for comparison with the alleged disputed signatures of late Jagannath in Ex.P.3, original affidavit dated for 18.09.2008, for comparison and to submit a report was rejected by the trial Court. -4-
NC: 2026:KHC:9782 WP No. 32769 of 2024 HC-KAR
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to respondents No.2 to 5 is dispensed with.
3. A perusal of the material on record indicates that the respondent - plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the petitioner - defendant no. 2 and other defendants for specific performance and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property and for other reliefs. In this context, the plaint averments disclose that the respondent plaintiff specifically contends that the late B. Jagannath, the father of the petitioner had executed a sale agreement dated 22.02.2003 as well as two affidavits dated 16.06.2004 and 18.09.2008 in favour of the respondent - plaintiff. In the written statement, the petitioner - defendant no. 2 disputed and denied all the aforesaid three documents produced by the plaintiff. However, during the course of evidence of PW-1 and DW- 1, the petitioner specifically contended that the alleged signatures of late Jagannath on the sale agreement - -5-
NC: 2026:KHC:9782 WP No. 32769 of 2024 HC-KAR Ex.P1 dated 22.02.2004 and the affidavit-Exs. P2 dated 16.06.2004 was taken on blank papers, while the alleged signature of Late Jagannath on Ex.P3, another affidavit dated 18.09.2008 was not that of Late Jagannath. In other words, the signatures of Late Jagannath on the sale agreement at Ex.P1 dated 22.02.2003 and the affidavit Ex.P2 dated 16.06.2004 were admitted by the petitioner, who however disputed the alleged signature of Late Jagannath in the affidavit dated 18.09.2008 marked as Ex.P3 in the suit.
4. Under these circumstances, the petitioner filed the instant application seeking referring of the disputed signatures found on Ex.P3 with the admitted signatures found on Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 to a handwriting expert for the purpose of comparison and obtaining a report in this regard. The said application having been opposed by the plaintiff, the trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order dismissing the application on the ground that Ex.P3 was not relevant or material for the purpose of -6- NC: 2026:KHC:9782 WP No. 32769 of 2024 HC-KAR adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties. In my considered opinion the said reasoning of the trial Court and a finding recorded by it by adverting to the merits and relevance of the documents was incorrect, was an incorrect approach adopted by the trial Court and contrary to the principles underlying Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 and Order XXVI Rule 10A of CPC, which contemplate that whenever admitted signatures and disputed signatures on two different documents are produced by the parties, it would be necessary to send the disputed signatures for comparison with the admitted signatures by invoking the said provisions and failure to appreciate this has resulted in erroneous conclusion.
5. In any event, since the respondent would be entitled to file objections to the report of the Court Commissioner /handwriting expert and also examine/cross-examine him if he so desires, it cannot be said that any prejudice will be caused to the respondent if -7- NC: 2026:KHC:9782 WP No. 32769 of 2024 HC-KAR the admitted signatures of late Jagannath found in Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 are sent to a handwriting expert/forensic science laboratory for comparison with his disputed signatures found on Ex.P3.
6. It is also pertinent to note that the comparison of the disputed signatures on Ex.P3 with the admitted signatures on Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 is relevant, material and germane for the purpose of adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties, which has also not been noticed by the trial Court while passing the impugned order, which warrants interference by this Court in the present petition. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the trial Court dismissing IA No. 11 has occasioned failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.
7. In the result, I pass the following:
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:9782 WP No. 32769 of 2024 HC-KAR ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. Impugned order dated 24.10.2024 is hereby set aside.
iii. IA No. 11 filed by the petitioner defendant no. 2 is hereby allowed.
iv. The trial Court is directed to refer the admitted signatures of Late Jagannath on Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 and any other document available in the records for comparison with the disputed signature of Late Jagannath contained in Ex.P3 to the following Court Commissioner/ handwriting expert/ Forensic Science Laboratory.
M/s.Truth Labs, 2nd Floor, Primus One, 28/2, Main Road, Siddapura, Whitefield, Bengaluru -560 066 -9- NC: 2026:KHC:9782 WP No. 32769 of 2024 HC-KAR v. The trial Court is directed to secure a report from the handwriting expert and proceed further in accordance with law. vi. Liberty is reserved in favour of both the parties to file objections to the Commissioner's report and examine/cross-examine him if they so desire.
vii. All rival contentions and all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BVK List No.: 3 Sl No.: 10